Monday, Aug. 4, 2003 | 9:15 a.m.
CARSON CITY -- The attorney for the Independent American Party denies he ever tried to improperly contact U.S. District Judge Kent Dawson on a lawsuit challenging a decision of the Nevada Supreme Court permitting the Legislature to pass taxes without a two-thirds vote.
Joel Hansen, lawyer and chairman of the party, also says he filed the suit in good faith and should not be subject to any sanctions as a result. Dawson dismissed the suit and scolded Hansen for his actions. He said Hansen "inappropriately tried to communicate ex-parte with the court" meaning the lawyer tried to talk to the judge without the other parties present.
Hansen said Saturday he initially sought a temporary restraining order and called Dawson's office to set up a meeting. He said he was told the judge does not conduct business that way.
Hansen said he has met with judges many times in his 25 years of law practice to obtain ex-parte emergency orders without the other side being present. He said he then submitted his request for a restraining order without talking to Dawson.
"In all of this, I have done nothing unethical, although I may have made some minor procedural errors in the rush of all that happened," Hansen said.
The judge also criticized Hansen for submitting the suit on "inadmissible hearsay" evidence that doesn't comply with the standard of trustworthiness. The suit quoted a Las Vegas Review-Journal columnist who wrote that he talked with an unidentified former judge who told him that Gov. Kenny Guinn talked with two justices of the Nevada Supreme Court before the governor filed his suit against the Legislature.
Guinn and Justices Bob Rose and Miriam Shearing have all denied there was any conversation about the case or attempt to seek a favorable judgment to force the Legislature to pass a school funding bill and a tax increase.
Dawson said basing a suit on "a mysterious uncited source would be like building a house of straw hoping to find some bricks later." He suggested there "are ethical and practical matters" facing Hansen.
But Hansen said he was not obliged to present all the evidence in the complaint.
He added he would have had an opportunity later in the suit to gather additional evidence and depositions to prove his point.
"We suspected foul play. I admit I can't prove it now," Hansen said.
But, Hansen said, he should have been given a chance to gather the additional evidence to shore up the allegations in the complaint.
"I am very disappointed with what Judge Dawson has said about me," Hansen said. "He is mistaken. I trust that these unfortunate statements were not made for the purpose of intimidating me and my clients and to protect fellow judges."
Hansen said he did not know whether he would refile the suit or start an initiative petition or referendum to repeal the $836 million tax package approved by the Legislature.
The Nevada Supreme Court ruled that only a majority vote is needed in the Legislature to pass a tax when the money is needed to fund the public schools.
The state Constitution requires a two-thirds vote for new or increased taxes, but another section requires the state to finance public schools. The court said the two-thirds majority must give way if it is preventing school funding.
archive
